Guo Gu wrote:The Chan tradition does not usually refer to steps or stages. Its central teaching is that we are intrinsically awake; our mind is originally without abiding, fixations, and vexations, and its nature is without divisions and stages. This is the basis of the Chan view of sudden enlightenment. If our mind’s nature were not already free, that would imply we could become enlightened only after we practiced, which is not so. If it’s possible to gain enlightenment, then it’s possible to lose it as well.

Consider a room, which is naturally spacious. However we organize the furniture in the room will not affect its intrinsic spaciousness. We can put up walls to divide the room, but they are temporary. And whether we leave the room clean or cluttered and messy, it won’t affect its natural spaciousness. Mind is also intrinsically spacious. Although we can get caught up in our desires and aversions, our true nature is not affected by those vexations. We are inherently free.

In the Chan tradition, therefore, practice is not about producing enlightenment. You might wonder, “Then what am I doing here, practicing?” Because practice does help clean up the “furniture” in the “room.” By not attaching to your thoughts, you remove the furniture, so to speak. And once your mind is clean, instead of fixating on the chairs, tables, and so on, you see its spaciousness. Then you can let the furniture be or rearrange it any way you want—not for yourself, but for the benefit of others in the room.

"The Sutras, Tantras, and Philosophical Scriptures are great in number. However life is short, and intelligence is limited, so it's hard to cover them completely. You may know a lot, but if you don't put it into practice, it's like dying of thirst on the shore of a great lake. Likewise, a common corpse is found in the bed of a great scholar." ~ Karma Chagme

Last time I checked Cha'an was a highly eloquent school that had no trouble clearly laying out it's doctrine. Obviously that did not carry over into the English because this is an unintelligible mish mash of 1000 distinct definitions being translated into the catch all "enlightenment".

If there is a radical inconsistency between your statements and the position you claim to hold,you are a sock puppet.Make as many accounts as you want; people can identify your deception with this test.

Guo Gu is also known as professor Jimmy Yu at Florida State University. He has a Ph.D. from Stanford, and grew up in the punk/straight-edge scene in New York.

I know that he's spent a good deal of time in Taiwan, but he is a Chinese-American with an excellent grasp of English. Pretty sure Guo Gu wrote the article in English himself, so what was lost if I may ask?

"The Sutras, Tantras, and Philosophical Scriptures are great in number. However life is short, and intelligence is limited, so it's hard to cover them completely. You may know a lot, but if you don't put it into practice, it's like dying of thirst on the shore of a great lake. Likewise, a common corpse is found in the bed of a great scholar." ~ Karma Chagme

The other point is, this talk is situated in the context of serious commitment. The sentence preceding the one quoted is 'You might ask, “I’ve been practicing for ten years now—exactly when is this going to hap­pen to me?” '

So I think it is a lesson about abandoning expectations, about expecting to get something. Whereas, I think if it taken to mean that I am already enlightened, then it can easily be misconstrued as a kind of short-cut. Whereas, to quote Huang-Po, another ancient Zen luminary:

Even if you understand this, you must make the most strenuous of efforts.

So, I think - excellent article, easily misconstrued. That perhaps is why a teacher is necessary.

In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities; in the expert's mind there are few ~ Suzuki-roshi

Expectations are built out of meaning. Wrong meaning will always bring wrong expectations. No meaning liberates expectations. We can explain it without contradicting ourselves. To say: we are already enlightened... one step away; undoubtedly brings confusion, and I assume that most people will suspect some mysterious meaning that fulfills both requirements, that is revealed to them after 10 years or so.

disjointed wrote:So,... this is an example of a message that is lost in translation?

Last time I checked Cha'an was a highly eloquent school that had no trouble clearly laying out it's doctrine. Obviously that did not carry over into the English because this is an unintelligible mish mash of 1000 distinct definitions being translated into the catch all "enlightenment".

Much of that nuance is contextual--the same term is used in again and again in different contexts, producing different meanings that are difficult to translate. The character "li" for instance, usually translated as "principle," is a good example of this.

Gwenn Dana wrote:Given that only the moment is experienced, it can either be clear or deluded. The next moment may be either. And the next. And the next.

Best wishesGwenn

So where does this moment end and the next one begin?

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed GyalpoThe Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

"Even if you practice only for an hour a day with faith and inspiration, good qualities will steadily increase. Regular practice makes it easy to transform your mind. From seeing only relative truth, you will eventually reach a profound certainty in the meaning of absolute truth."Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche.

The difference between delusion and enlightenment is only a moment away.

... The other point is, this talk is situated in the context of serious commitment. The sentence preceding the one quoted is 'You might ask, “I’ve been practicing for ten years now—exactly when is this going to hap­pen to me?” '

So I think it is a lesson about abandoning expectations, about expecting to get something. Whereas, I think if it taken to mean that I am already enlightened, then it can easily be misconstrued as a kind of short-cut. Whereas, to quote Huang-Po, another ancient Zen luminary:

Even if you understand this, you must make the most strenuous of efforts.

So, I think - excellent article, easily misconstrued. That perhaps is why a teacher is necessary.

I quite agree with that!

I would like to quote here from an article by Taigen Dan Leighton "Dogen's Zazen as Other-Power-Practice" were he wrote:

"Practice is the effect of realization, rather than its cause."

This followed a quote from Dogen's text Gakudo Yojinshu - Guidelines for Studying the Way which says:

A practitioner should not practice buddha-dharma for his own sake, to gain fame and profit, to attain good results, or to pursue miraculous power. Practice only for the sake of the buddha-dharma.

Towards the end of his article Ven Guo Gu writes:

Remember that practice is much more than following a particular method or going through stages on a path.

今以佛眼觀之佛與眾生同住解脫之床。無此無彼無二平等。Now, observing with the eye of the Buddha, both the Buddha and ordinary beings are in the same liberated state. There is neither this nor that: there is only non-duality and identity.- 空海 Kūkai in Unjigi 吽字義 The Meaning of the Letter Hūṃ - Kūkai on the Philosophy of Language by Takagi Shingen and Dreitlein Eijō_______Śrī Singha said to Padmasambhava:Since buddhas and sentient beings are inseparable and the same, it is necessary to respect all sentient beings as being on the same level with the buddhas. Can you? - translated by Malcolm N. Smith

I have read some of Guo Gu's words previously, and I think he is an excellent teacher of Zen/Chan for people in the West. The article in the OP is spot on and reminds me of Huang Po's writings. Essentially, there is no enlightenment to be attained, since we already are our own true nature. I like the cluttered room analogy - see through the mental dross and our true nature will shine through.

disjointed wrote:So,...this is an example of a message that is lost in translation?

Last time I checked Cha'an was a highly eloquent school that had no trouble clearly laying out it's doctrine.Obviously that did not carry over into the English because this is an unintelligible mish mash of 1000 distinct definitions being translated into the catch all "enlightenment".

Actually, I find it very intelligible.

Anders wrote:

disjointed wrote: Last time I checked Cha'an was a highly eloquent school that had no trouble clearly laying out it's doctrine.

Guo Gu wrote:The Chan tradition does not usually refer to steps or stages. Its central teaching is that we are intrinsically awake; our mind is originally without abiding, fixations, and vexations, and its nature is without divisions and stages. This is the basis of the Chan view of sudden enlightenment. If our mind’s nature were not already free, that would imply we could become enlightened only after we practiced, which is not so. If it’s possible to gain enlightenment, then it’s possible to lose it as well.

Consider a room, which is naturally spacious. However we organize the furniture in the room will not affect its intrinsic spaciousness. We can put up walls to divide the room, but they are temporary. And whether we leave the room clean or cluttered and messy, it won’t affect its natural spaciousness. Mind is also intrinsically spacious. Although we can get caught up in our desires and aversions, our true nature is not affected by those vexations. We are inherently free.

In the Chan tradition, therefore, practice is not about producing enlightenment. You might wonder, “Then what am I doing here, practicing?” Because practice does help clean up the “furniture” in the “room.” By not attaching to your thoughts, you remove the furniture, so to speak. And once your mind is clean, instead of fixating on the chairs, tables, and so on, you see its spaciousness. Then you can let the furniture be or rearrange it any way you want—not for yourself, but for the benefit of others in the room.

My understanding of both Huang Po and "The Supreme Source," a Dzogchen root text, is that, although we may speak of enlightenment and non-enlightenment, both concepts--which necessitate each other as opposites--are both illusory. Neither exist in reality, although both may be spoken of as learning aids.

According to Huang Po, all opposites must be dispensed with through the cessation of conceptual thought. According to the "Supreme Source," in reality enlightenment does not exist. According to Huang Po, talking of enlightenment is to be caught up in conceptual thought. Nevertheless, he may have used enlightenment as a learning aid, because conventional (dualistic?) thinking requires it.

Here is something I have not been able to reconcile. Huang Po says the cessation of conceptual thought requires great effort. According to the Dzogchen root text, effort only creates more suffering in Samsara. Which is correct? Somebody please tell me and explain why.

Huang Po says the cessation of conceptual thought requires great effort. According to the Dzogchen root text, effort only creates more suffering in Samsara. Which is correct? Somebody please tell me and explain why.

Answers:

Huang Po is correct--here in the Zen/Chan forum.

"The Supreme Source" is correct--in the Dzogchen forum.

At least that's according to the ToS.

If you ask me in "Exploring Buddhism" I'll have to admit I don't know.

In the Tantra of the Beautiful Auspiciousness (bKra shis mdzes ldan gyi rgyud), this "Great Primordial Purity" (spyi gzhi) is defined as follows:

What is known as "The Great Primordial Purity”Is the state abiding before authentic Buddhas aroseAnd before impure sentient beings appeared;It is called the great Primordial radiance of immutable awareness.

"In the Chan tradition, therefore, practice is not about producing enlightenment. You might wonder, “Then what am I doing here, practicing?” Because practice does help clean up the “furniture” in the “room.” By not attaching to your thoughts, you remove the furniture, so to speak. And once your mind is clean, instead of fixating on the chairs, tables, and so on, you see its spaciousness. Then you can let the furniture be or rearrange it any way you want—not for yourself, but for the benefit of others in the room"Ok not for yourself.....but I'm not sure about the benefit of others in the room? In the true non dual spirit, where are the others?